I don't disagree. But it is important to note that the minimum viable product for the creator of minecraft is significantly different from the minimum viable product for random internet denizen x. You are guaranteed a certain amount of customer engagement when your pre-existing customers have already begging for years to hear about your next product.
I would like to introduce you to our new game, titled "Fill in The Blank". You run around, maybe as part of a group of some sort. Maybe rescue some hostages, scout and snipe terrorists every now and then and maybe stab a chicken or two. Physic, shaders and purple monkey dishwasher; I'm surprised you got this far before signing up for our email notification subscription."
Yes, some personalities have plenty of currency to spend amongst their fan base.
Notch clearly disagrees: "The game is still extremely early in development, but like we did with Minecraft, we expect to release it early and let the players help me shape the game as it grows."
Design by committee ("the players say they really want X, let's include X") is not the same thing as design with consideration of feedback ("the players really liked X_0, let's build X_1, and deemphasize Y because it didn't turn out fun").
The fact that you're looking at the site is all the feedback he needs.
It's interesting the first iteration of the site was actually on April fools day, a good way to withdraw the idea if it sucked (no withdrawal needed ; ) ). I'm guessing but I wonder if there are more sites out there with slight variations on the idea to determine which one gets the most exitement and spreads the fastest
Notch understands "Minimum Viable Product"